Comments on: Where Markets Beat Government — and Vice Versahttp://www.thelibertypapers.org/2006/04/06/where-markets-beat-government-and-vice-versa/
Life. Liberty. Property. Defending individual freedom and liberty, one post at a time.Sun, 29 Mar 2015 04:30:00 +0000hourly1http://wordpress.org/?v=4.1.1By: Erichttp://www.thelibertypapers.org/2006/04/06/where-markets-beat-government-and-vice-versa/#comment-935
Thu, 13 Apr 2006 17:31:49 +0000http://www.thelibertypapers.org/2006/04/06/where-markets-beat-government-and-vice-versa/#comment-935Hey Peter, nice to see you commenting here. It’s not as active as ESR’s blog, but still good conversation!
]]>By: Peter Bessmanhttp://www.thelibertypapers.org/2006/04/06/where-markets-beat-government-and-vice-versa/#comment-934
Thu, 13 Apr 2006 15:20:07 +0000http://www.thelibertypapers.org/2006/04/06/where-markets-beat-government-and-vice-versa/#comment-934Chris has a good point, unfortunately. People, in large part, get the government they want — or rather the government they deserve.
]]>By: The Unrepentant Individual » Carnival Time!http://www.thelibertypapers.org/2006/04/06/where-markets-beat-government-and-vice-versa/#comment-929
Wed, 12 Apr 2006 03:32:48 +0000http://www.thelibertypapers.org/2006/04/06/where-markets-beat-government-and-vice-versa/#comment-929[…] And my post over at The Liberty Papers, entitled Where Markets Beat Government — and Vice Versa, was also submitted to the Carnival of Liberty XL. […]
]]>By: Chris Byrnehttp://www.thelibertypapers.org/2006/04/06/where-markets-beat-government-and-vice-versa/#comment-921
Fri, 07 Apr 2006 18:34:12 +0000http://www.thelibertypapers.org/2006/04/06/where-markets-beat-government-and-vice-versa/#comment-921Well, unfortunatley we DO ask the government to provide flood insurance.

And banking insurance

And medical insurance

And accident insurance

The problem isn’t so much the asking, as it is the unconrtollable urge of politicians to say “yes” whenever enough people ask them for something even though they KNOW they should say no.

]]>By: Peter Bessmanhttp://www.thelibertypapers.org/2006/04/06/where-markets-beat-government-and-vice-versa/#comment-918
Fri, 07 Apr 2006 05:43:46 +0000http://www.thelibertypapers.org/2006/04/06/where-markets-beat-government-and-vice-versa/#comment-918A good post. I agree with the above poster, and I also submit that there have been historical anarchist societies (medieval iceland, for instance) which didn’t devolve into the rule of the strong. It takes time to get peace from chaos, regardless if the end game is anarchistic or statist — Russia happened to choose the statist route.

That said, having given it a lot of thought, I’m of the mind that the difference between federalism and peaceful anarchy is largely 6 of one, half a dozen of the other — that is to say, the distinguishing feature of the two societies would be a technicality. The only question in my mind is the stability problem. What sand could we have thrown in the gears to prevent the atrocity that is our modern day federal government? On the other hand, anarchy is inherently difficult to coax into such a configuration, but for all we know it might not be feasible in the modern age.

So, although the path I take is a little different, I conclude in agreement with this post, and add that as we get closer and closer to a truly minimalist government, the degree to which we can rid ourselves of this necessary evil will become more obvious.

]]>By: Michael Hamptonhttp://www.thelibertypapers.org/2006/04/06/where-markets-beat-government-and-vice-versa/#comment-917
Fri, 07 Apr 2006 03:13:33 +0000http://www.thelibertypapers.org/2006/04/06/where-markets-beat-government-and-vice-versa/#comment-917The argument that government needs to regulate common carriers, or take them over entirely, is not supported by reality.

In this country, before the creation of the Federal Communications Commission, there were thousands of different phone companies, all competing with each other over various areas. AT&T was only the largest of these. It argued that the government needed to step in and solve the problem, and thereby secured its monopoly.

As we’ve seen in recent years with partial telecom deregulation, the problem, if you could call it that, was something that the market could easily have solved in the first place, had it been allowed to do so.